Harper has crushing poll lead on crisis
"Harper has crushing poll lead on crisis"
OTTAWA (Reuters) - Prime Minister Harper has mounted a crushing polling lead as the result of a political crisis in which an opposition coalition sought to take power, a new survey showed on Friday.
If an election were held now, Harper's Conservatives would take a whopping 46 percent of the vote, more than enough to transform his minority in Pa
More..rliament into a strong majority. In the October 14 election they received 37.6 percent of the vote.
The main opposition Liberals, the leftist New Democrats and the Bloc Quebecois, which wants to take Quebec out of Canada, signed a deal on Monday to try to replace Harper with a Liberal-NDP coalition supported by the Bloc.
They were upset with Harper's attempt, since withdrawn, to cut off direct subsidies of political parties and they also said he was not doing enough to boost the economy. During the election campaign, they had ruled out forming coalitions.
Harper mounted an attack on what he called a coalition driven by separatists and socialists, and public opinion swung his way.
Liberal support dropped to 23 percent from the 26.2 percent they won in the election and the New Democrats saw their backing fall to 13 percent from 18.2 percent.
An Ekos poll released the night before showed a lead of a similar magnitude, of 20 points, for the Conservatives.
Fifty-six percent of those polled by Ipsos Reid said they would rather go to another election, even though one was just held, rather than let the coalition govern.
Harper won seven weeks of breathing space on Thursday with the suspension of Parliament until late January, when he can present a budget with economic stimulus.
The coalition could try to bring him down then, though some Liberals are saying they should think hard before doing that.
Ipsos sampled 1,001 people, a sample which should carry a margin of error of 3.1 percentage points 19 times out of 20.
(Reporting by Randall Palmer; editing by Doina Chiacu) Less..
Added: Dec 5 2008 In: news_politics
By: TheGh0st 
- Views: 799 |
- Votes: 1 |
- Recommendations: 0 |
- Comments: 14
Comments - sort by newest to oldest
Ipsos is the same outfit that predicted a majority for Harper before the October election... look how that turned out. This whole thing is happening because of the illegal election that Harper called in October (he MADE it illegal to call an early election only a year before) This is only delaying the inevitable, Harper has a minority of the publics support, and in Canada that means he doesn't get to rule unless he plays nice. He tried to get rid of the $1.95 per vote the parties get, because his party has a lot of rich lobbiests in its pocket, but Canadians didn't fall for his right wing agenda. Goodbye Harper, don't let the door his ya in the ass...
Posted Dec-5-2008 by "steveaustin1971" (R)
Everything is fine here, considering... and these guys want to bring down the Government.
That is not going to help.
Posted Dec-5-2008 by "shuttlespace" (R)
He SHOULD get rid of that $1.95 per vote, I will say if and to WHAT party my tax dollars go to!.. and it will NOT be the Liberals or the Bloc!!!!! The Bloc should not even be allowed to exist in Federal politics.... Eastern Canada has always screwed the west, and this is them trying to do it again!
Posted Dec-5-2008 by "KevinofCAnada" (R)
I hope that Harper gets his majority. I believe that the political left in this country are going to pay a heavy price for trying to force themselves on the electorate. Cutting funding to the parties would hurt the conservatives the most, and would almost surely be a death blow to the Bloc.
Posted Dec-5-2008 by "tank2" (R)
THIS GOVERMENT IS THE BEST THING YOU COULD GET WITH PETRODOLLARS, THATS WHY THEY ARE CUTTING THE 1.95 PER VOTE.THEY HAVE PEOPLE WHO WILL FINANCE THE C.P. UNTIL THOSE SANDS ARE DRY. WE LOSE ON THIS ONE.
Posted Dec-5-2008 by "terryfalconbridge" (R)
Yeah this is what I don't understand, the country's political system is built the way it is around coalitions.
If you can form a majority coalition, regardless of who, that is the purpose of the system. I wouldn't say a perfect one, because this situation is very similar to the one in Ukraine, just a little different. It is all a power struggle by both sides, but in the end, majority rules.
Posted Dec-5-2008 by "ConservativeDrones" (R)
there is hope for canada afterall.
Posted Dec-5-2008 by "Kolariah" (R)
He SHOULD get rid of that $1.95 per vote, I will say if and to WHAT party my tax dollars go to!.. and it will NOT be the Liberals or the Bloc!!!!! The Bloc should not even be allowed to exist in Federal politics.... Eastern Canada has always screwed the west, and this is them trying to do it again!
The bloc members are elected by the people of Quebec.
Are you for democracy or not ?
I was listening to talk radio the other day. There were people that phoned in and said similer things to what you said here. All you are doing is alienating the people of Quebec.
Posted Dec-5-2008 by "Steve677" (R)
Yeah this is what I don't understand, the country's political system is built the way it is around coalitions.
If you can form a majority coalition, regardless of who, that is the purpose of the system. I wouldn't say a perfect one, because this situation is very similar to the one in Ukraine, just a little different. It is all a power struggle by both sides, but in the end, majority rules.
Canada has not had a coalition government since 1917, during WW1. One has to remember that, with so many political parties in Canada, pulling 40% of the vote will almost guarantee a majority government. Harper, with 38%, was just short of his majority. It wasn't until he proposed to cut funding to political parties, to show the public that politians will lead by example in these tough economic times, forcing them to raise their own cash, that they turned on him. I still think that if we have another election, the left will pay dearly, and the Conservatives will get their majority government.
Posted Dec-5-2008 by "tank2" (R)
OK. Im ignorant to all this. Can someone just give a short brief on what the hells going on up there?
Posted Dec-5-2008 by "SimpleSiren" (R)
"If an election were held now, Harper's Conservatives would take a whopping 46 percent of the vote, more than enough to transform his minority in Pa More..rliament into a strong majority. In the October 14 election they received 37.6 percent of the vote."
Even with these facts the opposition still make up 62% of the votes of all canadians. Even if the conservatives did win an election, If they don't get the confidence of the house, the same shit we are in right now could happend again. A majority government will only occur when the leading party holds more seats in the house then all combined opposition.
Posted Dec-5-2008 by "nechione" (B)
Yeah this is what I don't understand, the country's political system is built the way it is around coalitions.
If you can form a majority coalition, regardless of who, that is the purpose of the system. I wouldn't say a perfect one, because this situation is very similar to the one in Ukraine, just a little different. It is all a power struggle by both sides, but in the end, majority rules.
Canada has not had a coalition government since 1917, during WW1. One has to remember that, with so many political parties in Canada, pulling 40% of the vote will almost guarantee a majority government. Harper, with 38%, was just short of his majority. It wasn't until he proposed to cut funding to political parties, to show the public that politians will lead by example in these tough economic times, forcing them to raise their own cash, that they turned on him. I still think that if we have another election, the left will pay dearly, and the Conservatives will get their majority government.
OTTAWA -- If there's one point on which Stephen Harper has been adamant, it's his claim that the opposition politicians trying to strip him of power are undermining democracy.
"The Canadian government has always been chosen by the people," the prime minister declared in his mid-week televised address to the country.
But now, he told viewers, a coalition of opposition parties is trying to oust him through a backroom deal "without your say, without your consent and without your vote."
Just how valid is Harper's claim that changing governments without a new election would be undemocratic?
"It's politics, it's pure rhetoric," said Ned Franks, a retired Queen's University expert on parliamentary affairs. "Everything that's been happening is both legal and constitutional."
Other scholars are virtually unanimous in their agreement. They say Harper's populist theory of democracy is more suited to a U.S.-style presidential system, in which voters cast ballots directly for a national leader, than it is to Canadian parliamentary democracy.
"He's appealing to people who learned their civics from American television," said Henry Jacek, a political scientist at McMaster University.
HARPER SIGNED A SIMILAR DOCUMENT IN 2004!
Continued Read ON:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20081203/harper_undemocratic_081204/20081204?hub=Politics
Posted Dec-5-2008 by "nechione" (B)
He SHOULD get rid of that $1.95 per vote, I will say if and to WHAT party my tax dollars go to!.. and it will NOT be the Liberals or the Bloc!!!!! The Bloc should not even be allowed to exist in Federal politics.... Eastern Canada has always screwed the west, and this is them trying to do it again!
The bloc members are elected by the people of Quebec.
Are you for democracy or not ?
I was listening to talk radio the other day. There were people that phoned in and said similer things to what you said here. All you are doing is alienating the people of Quebec.
I heard on CTV last night that polls show Harpers image in quebec is severaly tarnished. And if an election where held he would lose 80-90% of his support in quebec, which was higher then ever pre coalition and actually helped streagthen his minority government from last election. This is due to his recent video addresses where he slams the opposition for making deals with the "seperatists" (which is a harsh and offenseive term in quebec) and is looked down upon by english speaking canadians. Then seconds later he address's the freach speaking canadians and calls then Sovereigntist. His political double talk don't help his cause at all, he calls for unity during a crisis then is trying to drive a wedge between english and freach canada.
Posted Dec-5-2008 by "nechione" (B)